Asia

Assassination in Kashmir

Even fundamentalists aren't safe

THE past few months have been relatively tranquil in Kashmir, at least compared with last year's summer of street protests, strikes and violence. On Friday April 8th the calm was shattered. A moderate leader, Maulana Shaukat Ahmed Shah, the head of the Wahhabi al Hadith organisation, was killed by an explosion as he parked his car at a regular spot while arriving at his mosque for Friday prayers.

His assassination is troubling. On a visit to Srinagar, the capital of Kashmir, late in 2010, I interviewed him at length about his organisation. Al Hadith promotes, peaceably, a conservative strain of Sunni Islam among the mainly Sufi Muslims of Kashmir. As we wrote then

A Wahhabi welfare organisation, al Hadith, which almost certainly benefits from generous Saudi funds, is quietly emerging as a powerful welfare, religious and cultural force. As others bicker, it has gone about building community centres, mosques, primary and secondary schools and clinics. It is seeking permission to set up a university. Its genial leaders deny being extremists, pointing to their love of education and computers; they say that in the planned university, women and non-Muslims will be enrolled too.

As for claims that the group, which says it has 1.5m members, is spreading conservative values in a territory long known for its Muslims' religious tolerance, one leader concedes only a “little, little component of cultural shifting”. A few more women are wearing burqas, or staying at home, than did in the past. More Arab-style mosques are springing up.

The non-Muslim minority in Kashmir is much less sanguine, seeing al Hadith as a proxy for Saudi interests and a powerful example of the spreading “pan-Islamisation” of Kashmir. They fret that ties may exist to Wahhabis elsewhere, including terrorists, and warn that a powerful new force is rising in the territory, filling a vacuum created by India. Just now their concerns seem overblown. But the government in Delhi would be wrong to think of Kashmir as yesterday's problem.

In my interview Mr Shah repeatedly explained how he was a moderate, in favour of non-violence, how he opposed the stone-pelting by youths and the violence which had ensued, claiming over 100 lives in 2010—and how it was a mistake to equate Wahhabis with violent extremists. “We have been fighting the hard-core ideology, we have made them non-existent…Though we are Wahhabis, fundamentalists, we seek communal harmony”, he suggested. Mr Shah's great goal was to set up a university in Srinagar where science and technology could be taught, where “we would allow women to study”, and also non-Muslims. This had long been blocked by a variety of Indian authorities. (This week's issue of The Economist includes a briefing on the way that the Russian state has inadvertently pushed Sufi communities in the north Caucasus into the arms of violent fundamentalism.)

When I suggested that a Wahhabi group such as his might one day be linked to the Taliban (who are also fundamentalists, and have ties to Wahhabis in Saudi Arabia), Mr Shah rejected the idea entirely, saying that we “want a modernised society”, unlike the backward-thinking movement that is so active in nearby Afghanistan and Pakistan. He pointed out too that, at the 700 or so mosques that his group claims to have built in Kashmir, students were taught English and the use of computers, not how to live in caves and fight wars.

One possibility is that such outspoken moderation provoked hardliners to kill the maulvi. Yet it is unclear, a few hours after his death, how to interpret the killing. Against the backdrop of violence in nearby Pakistan, the murder of a moderate leader (though a Sunni one) looks sadly in keeping with the times. The death of liberals, such as Salman Taseer, who was gunned down in January, makes headlines around the world. The regular explosions at Sufi and Ahmadi shrines and mosques, and the routine massacre of Shia worshippers, presumably by extremist Sunnis, now hardly attract outsiders' attention. Hardliners across the border seem ever more willing to get rid of other Muslim opponents through violence.

Indian-run Kashmir is not Pakistan, of course, but it too has a history of assassinated separatist leaders. Those who seem to be growing more moderate as they age are especially at risk. The assassinations get blamed on a range of potential killers—the Indian state, extremists who have crossed the border from Pakistan, rival factions within Kashmir. But in January a few Kashmiris, responding to a modest thawing of tensions over Kashmir, admitted that some of the high-profile killings, commonly attributed on Indian forces, were in fact done by Kashmiris themselves.

One question now is what happens to al Hadith. The extensive Wahhabi network was able to grow quickly in Kashmir, not only because of its generous overseas funding, but also because it was led by a moderate figure. If a more hardline leader were to take over, al Hadith might well come to be considered a greater threat to the valley's Sufi moderates. A second question is whether the killing will provoke renewed violence in this dangerous corner of the world. As news of the murder spread, shops in Srinagar reportedly rolled down their shutters and nervous residents hunkered in their homes, fearing protests and anger.

Greenj76 - At least the Mayan's had the honesty to set a date certain for their apocalypse, so that on New Years' day 2013 we can revise the wikipedia article and move on with the real challenges at hand.

The problem that the world leaders and reporters miss is that Islam is not in peace with itself. If there is no peace within, its members resort to violence outside and look for option to put blame of their situations.

Followers of Islam run away from rulers of Islam, and seek shelter in democracies.

As a muslim convert who once considered himself a Salafi/Wahabi I laugh at how non muslims seem to know whats on muslim's minds. This is not a new phenomenon to me, as an African American I go through it too when when non blacks assume I only like rap music. Maybe if you spoke to those of us Salafi/wahabis that want to live in peace, make money and own nice homes, instead of considering us one evil group, we could find common ground.

But if you tell me I'm the enemy you alienate me. If the majority in the west considers me the enemy you leave me the choice but to consider you the enemy. I can't speak for other groups but the majority of Salafi in America are African American and can't find jobs. These are usually the more ?Radical? The ones who are gainfully employed tend to be more moderate.

In other words, if given a real choice, men will choose feeding their families over going to war. the problem starts when they have no choice.

The spread of radical Islam with the help of liberal politicians is setting the stage for Bible prophecy to be fulfilled.

Today one in every four people on the earth are of the Islamic faith and that number is increasing daily. There are several voices in our world that are shouting out a warning to humankind to be alert to the global designs of Islam. One such voice is that of the Dutch politician Geert Wilders who with his documentary film and lectures around the world, is warning the world that there may be moderate Moslems, the people of Islam, but there is no moderate Islam, the religion. Wilders says that the Islamic holy book, the Koran, calls for a worldwide kingdom under the god of Islam, Allah, and Islamic jihad, holy war, as the means to reaching that goal.

Bible prophecy itself calls for a worldwide kingdom under Jesus Christ, the holy One of the Holy Bible. In fact, God made a promise to King David many years ago that that would happen. It is called the Davidic Covenant recorded in II Samuel 7. The Bible says that there will be a kingdom headquartered in Jerusalem (Zechariah 6:12-13) and it will last for 1000 years (Revelation 20:4-6). The Bible actually contradicts the Koran. The Koran says that the Islamic god Allah had no son. The Bible says that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the coming King of the worldwide kingdom.

The liberal politicians helping the spread of Islam is indeed helping to set the stage for Bible prophecy to be fulfilled.

Mohammed the messenger at times convulsed while foaming at the mouth when the supposed word of God was revealed to him. His physical condition is usually associated with someone possesed by demonic spirit rather than one recieving Divine inspiration.

Consider also that in chapter 9 section 5 - The Koran says 'slay Christians and Jews anywhere you find them. Sure sounds like a heavenly message.

Chapter 5 verse 51 - The Koran Admonishes the faithful to not befriend the Christians or Jews. He who turns to them for friendship will become one of them.

Chapter 9 Verse 21 - Fight against those who believe not in Allah. Defeat them, tax them into poverty then convert them to the faith. Take their wives, daughters after slaying them.

Chapter 4 - 1 Here it even comments on Christainity - claiming that Jesus did not die on the cross nor was he resurrected. That he was not the son of God.

Chapter 9 / 30: Curse those who worship the Christ.

Mohammed married upwards of 22 women and asked his followers to limit theirs to four. He married a 6 year old Aisha and took her to his wedding bed when she was just nine years old and he was well into his forties. If this is not horrific then I don't know what is!!

The Koran instructs the Muslims to lie and decieve the kafir until they are defeated and subjugated. The goal is to establish a worldwide Caliphate.

Consider these few facts when analyzing the fanatical followers of this religion.

We the people of goodwill and decency need to fight this consumate and unrelenting evil. But first we need to wake up to the looming and grave danger facing us.

"A moderate leader, Maulana Shaukat Ahmed Shah, the head of the Wahhabi al Hadith organisation, was killed by an explosion as he parked his car at a regular spot while arriving at his mosque for Friday prayers. "

Hehe the head of a Wahabbi organization (is it Ah le hadith not al hadith?) is moderate LOLZ! Forgive me if i don't shed too many tears for him.

On a different note it seems like he was dispatched to his heavenly abode by the "agencies" (which one is a good question?). Scary life-imitating-fiction kinda stuff. Even mullahs are NOT supposed to cross a line it seems.

The late Mr Shah may well have been a 'moderate', but by his own admission, the Wahhabis are intrinsicly fundamental militants, who support violent jihad. Even his concessionary remark: "“we would allow women to study”, and also non-Muslims", smacks of their underlying & latent prejudices.

Needless to say, his assasination is a sad & tragic episode & a greivous blow to the fledgling 'moderate' movement in violence-torn Kashmir. Logic dictates it was commited by fundamentalist dissidents, either from within his sect, or from across the border, who very possibly consider him an apostate.

@ Not On your nelly
Worried about the catering service in the afterlife?
Cannot the creator of the universe feed us? He fed the Israelis with manna and quail everyday for 40 years.
As I understand by the Koran, food in the afterlife depends on whether one's been naughty or nice. If you've been nice you get whatever you desire...I'd want a roast beef sandwich with sparkling strawberry wine. If someone's been naughty ..well he might get a "used" sandwich and recycled wine.

If you conveted to Islam you'd become a sexy muslim. Just don't wear a suicide west over your six-pack... you'd cut a sorry figure.

Discontent throughout the Middle-East will grow until every citizen has a job or welfare check. Due to economic limitations useful jobs are not available, but inessential jobs can be created and welfare checks given to the unemployable. This solution is unrealistic but it is demanded by the faithful. Unrealistic demands in the Middle-East will logically lead to the genocide of the useless unless God is great and pays the bills.

"In other words, if given a real choice, men will choose feeding their families over going to war. the problem starts when they have no choice."

That's an old canard, Mike. In fact I go so far as to say it's an out-and-out dodge of the issue of why the world faces widespread radical Islamist-inspired violence today. Consider the main players in the major radical Islamist-inspired attacks in the US and Europe. The 19 suicide killers in the 9/11 attacks were by anyone's standard pretty comfortable. Bin Ladin himself was (at one time anyway) a millionaire. The nut-rolls who blew themselves up in London - along with 52 innocents killed and hundreds wounded - were generally described as living normal student and middle-class lives. Their motivations weren't poverty, they were religious fanaticism and hatred grounded in their interpretation of Salafist Islam. Just who considered who "the enemy" was pretty obvious in these situations.

Since you've been able to reevaluate your religious beliefs, you might reconsider your political points of view as well.

Religious people where ever they are, whoever they may be are all intrinsically retarded and inherently evil and unbalanced. Bigoted with hatred of things they are either too stupid to understand or too pigheaded to accept for fear of exposing their ignorance. A manic depressive lot of abnormally mindless depraved individuals void of soul in their very being. Those of the Islamic ilk don't even know the meaning of the word and that's because they are fundamentally not spiritual and therefore lacked the ability to love (to possess, yes) and to empathize. They are in essence heartless.